🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking law that would curb the global scourge of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was gutted," stated the law's original author, pointing to the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to check the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law proposed to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track goods to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."